Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 25 MAY 2016

Suing Not Too Wisely

Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Contributor
Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Our high-caliber legal representation and advanced delivery capabilities allow us to take on our...

View firm profile
Explore more from Seyfarth Shaw LLP

A district court in Minnesota recently found an employee could not challenge a plan's blanket transgender exclusion under Title VII, when the employee was not transgender but her son was.

United StatesEmployment and HR

Seyfarth Synopsis: A district court in Minnesota recently found an employee could not challenge a plan's blanket transgender exclusion under Title VII, when the employee was not transgender but her son was. The Court went on to find that a third party administrator could not be sued for the blanket plan exclusion under the Affordable Care Act, when the complaint did not name the correct TPA and when all the TPA was alleged to have done was to follow the plan's terms.

Existing federal laws have limits when it comes to who can be sued to redress claims of transgender benefits discrimination, so held the District of Minnesota recently in Tovar v. Essentia Health, LLC, et al, No. 16-cv-100 (May 11, 2016). In Tovar, plaintiff's health-coverage was provided under a benefit plan that expressly excluded covering any "services and/or surgery for gender reassignment." Plaintiff's son was a plan beneficiary, who was denied coverage when he sought gender affirmation surgery (and

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from